Posted on 03/17/2012 7:02:53 AM PDT by NYer
During the meeting of 14 September 2011 between Cardinal William Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and president of the Pontifical Commission ‘Ecclesia Dei,’ and Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X, the latter was presented with a Doctrinal Preamble, accompanied by a Preliminary Note, as a fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See. This defined certain doctrinal principles and criteria for the interpretation Catholic doctrine, which are necessary to ensure faithfulness to the Church Magisterium and ‘sentire cum Ecclesia.’
“The response of the Society of St. Pius X to the aforesaid Doctrinal Preamble, which arrived in January 2012, was examined by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith before being submitted to the Holy Father for his judgement. Pursuant to the decision made by Pope Benedict XVI, Bishop Fellay was, in a letter delivered today, informed of the evaluation of his response. The letter states that the position he expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems which lie at the foundation of the rift between the Holy See and the Society of St. Pius X.
“At the end of today’s meeting, moved by concern to avoid an ecclesial rupture of painful and incalculable consequences, the superior general of the Society of St. Pius X was invited to clarify his position in order to be able to heal the existing rift, as is the desire of Pope Benedict XVI.
SSPX ping!
I am never going to understand this. Can someone help clarify what the doctrinal differences are that are in contention? Or at least point me toward a book or article?
Simply put, the SSPX does not recognize Vatican Council II. Perhaps the following article will fill in some of the blanks.
Vatican on Society of St. Pius X: Position Insufficient to Restore Full Unity With Church at Present
Thee used to be serious differences in the celebration of Mass: SSPX insisted on the Latin Mass and the Vatican would defend the so called Novus Ordo — Mass translated into English (or French, or other local tongue) with the priest facing the congregation; certain rubrics shortened or eliminated, or made optional.
That got resolved about five years ago as this Pope instructed the bishops to allow Traditional Mass celebrated wherever there is a demand for it from the faithful.
The doctrinal differences remain. The two sticking points are ecumenism and freedom of conscience. Vatican II is perceived to allow for the existence of several valid Churches, whereas traditionally there was understood to be One True Church. This is how SSPX views its differences on ecumenism: they don’t like that there are now sort of several chruches and an invisible super-church above them. That is dangerously Protestant idea. The Vatican has moved to clarify that, for example, pointing out that the Orthodox are “wounded” churches and the Protestants are not really a church at all. Yet that does not seem to satisfy SSPX.
Also, SSPX is concerned that the Jewish religion is elevated to some status among other false religions. The traditional view is that Catholicism is true Judaism after the work of Christ on the Cross, and the Church is true Jerusalem.
Also, there are passages in Vatican II on the freedom of conscience that feed into the all-permissiveness of modern mentality and they want hardening of the doctrine on that.
This is all just my impressions, others are welcome to add or correct me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.